Punjab and Haryana High Court
CWP/18607/2025 of SUKHPAL SINGH BHULLAR Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(1) CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS on 10 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Sukhpal Singh Bhullar Income Tax Officer, Ward CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Present : Mr. for the petitioner Mr. Yogesh Mr. Vaibhav Gupta and Mr. Vidul Kapoor, for the Income Tax Department DEEPAK SIBAL Challenge
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
CWP-18607-2
IN THE Sukhpal Singh Income Tax O
CORAM : H
H
Present : M fo
M
M M
fo
DEEPAK SIB
C dated 25.06.20 under Section challenge rais issued by the done because i issued by the notice could ha
2. In petitioner plac i. CWP India 2025 (O&M)
Sr. No.133
E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB CHANDIGARH
CWP-1860 Date of De
h Bhullar
Versus fficer, Ward 6(1), Chandigarh an
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPA HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA Mr. Kartik Bansal, Advocate or the petitioner. Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Stand Mr. Vaibhav Gupta and Mr. Vidul Kapoor, Jr. Standing C or the Income Tax Department-re *** BAL, J. (Oral)
Challenge made through the ins 025 (Annexure P-1) issued to the 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1 ed by the petitioner is that th Jurisdictional Assessing Office in terms of the notification dated Ministry of Finance, Governm ave been issued only by way of f n support of his afore submiss es reliance on the following two P-15745-2024, titled Jatinder S a and others, decided on 19.07.2
B AND HARYANA AT H 07-2025 (O&M) ecision : 09.07.2025
…Petitioner
nd others
…Respondents AK SIBAL A BANERJI ding Counsel and ounsels espondents. stant petition is to the notice e petitioner by the respondents 1961. The primary ground of e impugned notice has been er which could have not been d 29.03.2022 (Annexure P-2), ment of India, the impugned faceless assessment. sion, learned counsel for the o judgments of this Court:- Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of 2024; and VANDANA 2025.07.11 10:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-18607-2
ii. CWP other
3. L that the case o through the af Benches of thi
4. In Jatinder Sing dated 25.06.20 Officer, is here the petitioner i
5. T
July 09, 2025 vandana
Whether speak Whether repor 2025 (O&M)
P-21509-2023, titled Jasjit Sin rs, decided on 29.07.2024. earned counsel for the responde of the petitioner is covered in his foresaid two judgments rendered is Court in Jatinder Singh Bhan n the light of the above, in ter gh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh ( 025 (Annexure P-1), issued by eby quashed with liberty to the r in accordance with law. he petition is allowed in the abov
(DEEPA
J (LAPIT
J
king/reasoned :
Yes/No rtable :
Yes/No gh Vs. Union of India and ents does not dispute the fact s favour by the law laid down d by two different co-ordinate ngu and Jasjit Singh (supra). rms of the law laid down in (supra), the impugned notice y the Jurisdictional Assessing respondents to proceed against ve terms. AK SIBAL) JUDGE
TA BANERJI) JUDGE VANDANA 2025.07.11 10:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document